Christ was a common name

Started by Deb, November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Deb

November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PM Last Edit: November 27, 2021, 09:29:23 AM by Deb
Is it just me, or does this bother anyone else?

"It was the Jewish tradition that nourished the new religion in its early stages. Christ, as you know, was a common name, so when I say that there was a man named Christ involved in those events, I do not mean to say that he was the biblical Christ. His life was one of those that were finally used to compose the composite image of the biblical Christ." (In Chapter 20 of Seth Speaks, see Session 586 for July 24, 1971.)  —TMA Session Eleven: September 15, 1980

Although catholicism did not stick with me, I do remember this much: Christ was not Jesus's name, it was his title, meaning the anointed or chosen one. His name was Jesus (in Hebrew Yeshua). Which I imagine WAS a common name at the time. Even is to this day.

But why would Seth call Jesus "Christ" and say it was a common name? Shouldn't he know better? For that matter, shouldn't Jane and Rob?

It really bugs me. I should take a look at Mary's book comparison of Seth Speaks, Rob's transcripts vs. what was actually published. It could have been something the Amber-Allen editors changed on their own.
Love it! Love it! x 1 View List

LarryH

Quote from: Deb on November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PMIs it just me, or does this bother anyone else?

Not just you. It bothers me too.
Like Like x 1 View List

barrie

November 27, 2021, 03:13:34 AM #2 Last Edit: November 27, 2021, 04:23:00 AM by barrie
Quote from: Deb on November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PMChrist, as you know, was a common name

Deb, I cannot find Seth saying this or anything like it anywhere in Seth Speaks or within it in Session 586.

But I think I figured it out.

In "Magical Approach, "Session 11, 11-15-80," Seth DID say, "Christ, as you know, was a common name..." BUT in context, I believe he was saying that there were many men being referred to as Christ at that time...and Seth KNEW "Christ" was not a name.

In context, in the next paragraph, Seth says: "As I stated before, that part of the world was filled with would be messiahs, self proclaimed prophets, and so forth, and in those terms it was only a matter oftime before man's great spiritual and psychic desires illuminated and filled up that psychological landscape, filling the prepared psychological patterns with a new urgency and intent. There were many throw away messiahs (with gentle amusement)—men whose circumstances, characteristics, and abilities were almost (musically) the ones needed—who almost (musically) filled the psychic bill, but who were unfitted for other reasons: They were of the wrong race, or their timing was off. Their intersection with space and time did not mesh with the requirements."

Barrie Comments: It makes sense to me that many of these "would be messiahs, self proclaimed prophets... throw away messiahs" would have been referred to as Christ, meaning the "anointed or chosen one." 

The following is why I also believe Seth KNEW, "Christ" was NOT a name:

Seth refers the reader to Seth Speaks in comments in Magical Approach. In Seth Speaks, there are various places, at which Seth refers to "Christ" as a "thing" (my word).

For example: In Session 560, Seth says, "This does not mean that A CHRIST has appeared within each system of reality."

You don't say that about a name. You wouldn't say, "This does not mean that A DEB has appeared within each system..."

You WOULD say, "This does not mean that DEB has appeared within each system..."

Also, in Seth Speaks, he makes other "title" references. For example, he refers to "THE Christ Entity.'

He doesn't refer to other entities in the that manner. For example, he doesn't say, "The Ruburt entity." He would say, "Ruburt's entity." Note,, he doesn't say, "Christ's entity"—as if Christ was just a name and not a title. But he says, "The Christ Entity."

With a title, you say "the." For example, if you are talking about a king...you would say, "the king's entity" and you would NOT say, "King's entity."

So, to me, it is clear that Seth knew Christ was not a name. And when he said, "Christ, as you know, was a common name..." – he meant that many people are around this time were referred to as Christ.

LarryH

Quote from: Deb quoting Seth on November 17, 2021, 04:36:06 PMChrist, as you know, was a common name, so when I say that there was a man named Christ involved in those events...

At least two of us serious Seth readers read that sentence in a way that gave us pause. If Seth did not mean what he clearly stated here, as Barrie shows, then that statement could have been worded in a less misleading manner.
Like Like x 1 View List

Deb

November 27, 2021, 09:38:44 AM #4 Last Edit: November 27, 2021, 09:31:28 PM by Deb
Quote from: barrie on November 27, 2021, 03:13:34 AMDeb, I cannot find Seth saying this or anything like it anywhere in Seth Speaks or within it in Session 586.

But I think I figured it out.

In "Magical Approach, "Session 11, 11-15-80," Seth DID say, "Christ, as you know, was a common name..." BUT in context, I believe he was saying that there were many men being referred to as Christ at that time...and Seth KNEW "Christ" was not a name.

Yes, you're right, it's from Magical Approach. I had seen the mention of Seth Speaks in the quote and for some reason I put that in. A brain f*rt. I should have just quoted directly from the search engine. I fixed that in my first post here.

"Jewish shepherds represented the placenta that was meant to be discarded, for it was Jewish tradition that nourished the new religion in its early stages before its birth. Christ, as you know, was a common name, so when I say that there was a man named Christ involved in those events (see Seth Speaks), I do not mean to say that he was the biblical Christ. His life was one of those lives that were finally used to compose the composite image of the biblical Christ."
—TMA Session Eleven: September 15, 1980

Thanks Barrie for the explanation of what Seth meant. But it still bothers me. :) Seth was always so accurate, poetic and clever in his use of language. To me it would be like him saying "as you know, Mister is a common name." Or something similar. I'm also surprised that Rob, Jane or an editor didn't catch that. I'm hoping that it was a mistake in Rob's note taking since he was neither raised Catholic like Jane, nor a pope in a past life like Seth (as far as I know). Even my former in-laws, who were Jewish, were fond of telling me that "Jesus" was a Jew. Not that I've ever been religious. Seth does refer to him in other places as either Jesus or Christ.

I did look at Mary's comparison of Rob's transcript to the published version, and in this case they match.

Love it! Love it! x 1 View List

barrie

November 27, 2021, 10:16:43 PM #5 Last Edit: November 27, 2021, 10:36:25 PM by barrie
Quote from: LarryH on November 27, 2021, 08:34:38 AMcould have been worded in a less misleading manner
Hi Larry H and Deb,

To me, it was not misleading at all. I took it to mean just what I said. Not many people know too much or care about Jesus or Christ...and to say "it was a common name" when talking about all the many Christs and false martyrs walking around--was very sensible.

Out of context it may seem odd...but to me, anyway, in context, it was not odd or disappointing at all...especially when in context Seth referred the "the Christ Entity" which implies a title--like if you say "the King's entity" and not "King's entity" as if you were talking about a person. 

Also, at the time, if Jane or Rob thought that Seth actually literally meant "name" -- I think they would have said something. So, I believe they also took it the way I am taking it.

As far as I can, Seth never said "Christ's entity" but always said "the Christ entity" -- and I went thru all of his works.

Like Like x 2 View List